Ruger Gunsite Scout - Ruger Magazine vs Alpha Industries Type II Magazine

[45 2.1]

If you bother going to the link I posted it gives a review and some more pictures

I'm on dial up..... Most of the links here won't open for me.... and I did try.
Knowing where the button is explains most of the picture now. A good idea there.

[45 2.1]

I know - but we all have our boundaries, heck it's people that are not happy with what they can get that keep custom gunsmiths and kitchen table smiths busy, and where good used guns come from.

Some of those people actually improve a product by theirselves. They patent the improvement and sell the improvement back to the producer. That happens quite a bit. Things improve one step at a time from someone who sees a better way.... and assuming your at the top of the food chain usually gets your backside bit.

[weeble]

Not sure I really want to add to this debate...but when you hold an AR by the "magazine" you're (likely) gripping the magazine well and not the actual magazine. When I was on active duty we were taught not to use that style of hold and only grip by the forearm. But then, that was a long time ago.

After reading through this thread I went out and checked my GSR, and discovered that it will indeed fail to feed when held in such a way. Tried it with the steel and polymer 10 round, same result. I have no 5s to try, and didn't bother with the 3 because it's more or less flush. I have two points to raise. First, I couldn't get into this grip position using the sling. I'm using a Ching sling, and the middle stud/strap makes such a grip impossible. I then switched to a 1907, and couldn't adjust it to get there either. Using a simple strap (hasty sling) it can be done, but I couldn't get it tight enough to be truly stable. I think that in order for the shooting sling to function as a shooting sling, your support hand needs to be closer to the front stud. If I abandoned the sling, then no problem.

Second, and this is just a thought, do all platforms that use AICS compatible magazines have the same retention system as the Ruger? I've never seen one, but it would seem a reasonable assumption if the magazines are compatible. Yet you don't read of feeding problems due to magazine retention.

I really don't think this is a flaw with the Ruger. Reason being, I never would have discovered this "problem" on my own. I'm not bashing your style. Everyone shoots differently, and you need to do it the way that works for you. That way may not be compatible with the RGSR or other rifles that use AICS magazines.

Cheers

[45 2.1]

I really don't think this is a flaw with the Ruger. Reason being, I never would have discovered this "problem" on my own. I'm not bashing your style. Everyone shoots differently, and you need to do it the way that works for you. That way may not be compatible with the RGSR or other rifles that use AICS magazines.

Actually, I discovered this shooting long range. I was leaning against a big round bale shooting at a white milk jug some 500 yards from me. I was using the bale as a rest and brace. I cycled the bolt and got a jam. More playing showed what happened with the magazine tilt. It is also a problem at low prone due to the magazine length. Why this wasn't caught and corrected is somewhat of a mystery to me. I do like the support style holding the magazine front as it allows proper bone on bone as taught in the military target shooting manuals... much more steady at distance with more efficient firearms. The style Randy related may be just the berries for the action shooting game, but I've see many photos from the sandbox showing many styles of hold also.

[deces]

I would of bought this rifle if ruger had made it use relatively cheap battle proven M-14 mags, but nooo, they had to go all odd ball.

[HawkCreek]

Some thread resurrection here.

I took delivery of my GSR in Feb of 2012 and have kept two loaded 10 round polymer magazines with it ever since. Just before Christmas they became to weak to feed reliably. This is better service than others have reported but obviously is less than what should be delivered. After the first of the year I'll email Ruger to see what they say but no matter what I'll be trying out an Alpha mag or two. I need a magazine that doesn't need to be babied and wont lose spring tension for my ranch rifle.

I don't buy the concept of moving the left arm out as far front as possible because it forces you to rely on muscles rather than skeleton which results in firing position less stable than when your arms are pulled in close enough to reduce involvement of muscles in holding the rifle.

It's a hold for social work not punching paper. At room distance you dont need bone on bone support you need to get on target fast and you need to get heavy on the trigger.

Haha........ With short arms, you learn to hold on the front of a magazine, bolt or semi-auto.... of course you don't change your hold. Cycle the bolt and see what happens when you hold the front of the mag. Still a poor retention system compared to most other things.

I understand what you're saying about the slop. Seems flimsy for what is on otherwise pretty well done carbine. I have a later GSR (with the second style raven) and with all of my magazines I tried to replicate the failure to feed as you described it. Mine functions every time, possibly Ruger has tightened things up since yours came out. Then again on the other hand maybe you have a tolerance stack that allows it to happen and I ended up with a tighter one, I dont know.

Thanks for the pointer, I'll check it out. But I know I would rather take a split second longer to acquire good aim than have to fire multiple shots- for multiple reasons.

When you're in a room with guys that done like you and they have full auto AK-47's you dont have a split second to waste and bone on bone is a waste of time in that situation. Hunting or punching paper is obviously a different horse entirely.

[45 2.1]

I understand what you're saying about the slop. Seems flimsy for what is on otherwise pretty well done carbine. I have a later GSR (with the second style raven) and with all of my magazines I tried to replicate the failure to feed as you described it. Mine functions every time, possibly Ruger has tightened things up since yours came out. Then again on the other hand maybe you have a tolerance stack that allows it to happen and I ended up with a tighter one, I dont know.

I've had access to several, from the first few weeks of production to less than 6 months ago. The early ones were sloppy on mag fit while the last stainless one is a whole lot better, but not perfect as of yet. The five round steel has been the most reliable mag so far. The Ruger poly mags have VERY POOR mag springs.... really too soft to feed all the rounds reliably.

When you're in a room with guys that done like you and they have full auto AK-47's you dont have a split second to waste and bone on bone is a waste of time in that situation. Hunting or punching paper is obviously a different horse entirely.

If I'm in that kind of situation, I'm not going to have a bolt gun and I will not have any trouble using my present style of holding.

[liliysdad]

The AICS pattern mag and mag release has been in use for along time, and is the standard for this sort of thing. There is no design flaw, and it works as intended. Not just in the Ruger, but in the hundreds of thousands of other boltguns that have this type of magazine system.

[2AMMD]

My opinion..guns and plastic simply don't belong together. The new guns will most likely have some sort of composite "HI TECH" stock. some of them will even have plastic parts in the action. Give me the old stuff!!!

[liliysdad]

Plastic is just fine, and even better, in a lot of places within the firearms world. Polymer magazines are often better than metal, such as Magpul magazines vs. aluminum for the AR platform rifle. In rifle stocks, they are a wise choice if concerned with weather, wear, or weight. In handguns, the polymer frame is most likely one of the biggest leaps in firearms technology as a whole.

[45 2.1]

Some folks just don't see things the same. When I pay good money for something, I expect it to work... first time, every time with no junk parts (keep your plastic). This magazine system don't.......... and I won't be buying ANY other rifle using it. I've used several other systems that gave absolutely no trouble handled every which way possible. Seems the testing people were more interested in giving a good review than debugging the system. Too bad the military didn't test it.

[HawkCreek]

You must not drive a very new vehicle if you wont use plastic parts. Modern polymers are often stronger than the aluminum (and often steels) than they replace. Admittedly it doesn't take to the blueing tank as readily but that doesn't mean its a junk part.

You can buy replacement bottom METAL here. It's only $120, that's actually a pretty good price for bottom metal designed for AICS magazines. It's easily double that from Badger Ordinance or CDI Precision (of course they are for Remmy 700's and not Rugers).

[liliysdad]

I would of bought this rifle if ruger had made it use relatively cheap battle proven M-14 mags, but nooo, they had to go all odd ball.

AICS pattern mags are NOT oddball, they are the standard in magazine fed bolt action rifles. They have been in use for quite a long time, and are battle proven.

[45 2.1]

AICS pattern mags are NOT oddball, they are the standard in magazine fed bolt action rifles. They have been in use for quite a long time, and are battle proven.

OK...... I think you need to elaborate on this wonderful system that you say is standard. The Ruger Gunsite magazine is double stack tapering into a single straight line feed. It fits a polymer trigger guard plate/magazine well (that is sloppily fit) that the magazine goes into and is retained only by a spring loaded lever fitting into an extruded notch on the back of the magazine. Please name a few of magazine bolt actions and the battle proven rifles like this.

[liliysdad]

I am quite familiar with the magazine system...its not a new thing.

Other than the plastic bits, the magazine and similar latch arrangement has been in use for a long, long time by Accuracy International. Newer iterations of the US Army's m24 sniper rifle use this magazine configuration, in both Badger M5 retrofits and the newest chassis fitted versions. TO claim that the m24 is not battle proven would be a bit silly, and the Accuracy International rifles have been in service with a number of militarys across the globe for a very long time. If one considers law enforcement use, the field grows immensely.

There are currently dozens of manufacturers producing retrofit bottom metal using this magazine and latch system, such as Badger, CDI, PT&G, Seekins and many others. Chassis builders such as Accuracy International, McRee, Rock Solid, KRG, Manners and others uses this magazine and latch. Custom rifle builders such as GAP, Gradous, DTA, and others use this magazine system.

Magazines in this pattern are produced by Alpha, Accuracy International, McRee, Accurate Mag, and now Ruger. Magazines are built in .223, .308, .300WM, and .338 Lapua lengths, as well as custom lengths within these caliber sizes. So yes, this is has become the standard in bolt action rifle magazines, and yes, they work. Well.

Perhaps the Ruger design is not the best. maybe it has flaws, and I do not care for the plastic in this particular design, but to condemn the entire platform as flawed or nonfunctional is a bit silly.

[45 2.1]

I do believe that you are comparing a match rifle to a battle rifle. While these others are purpose built, cost a lot and those builders reputations depend on things working.... Ruger fell on their sword implementing their version.

[liliysdad]

The M24 and Accuracy International rifles are hardly match rifles, but keep telling yourself whatever makes you feel better. You seem to be the only one complaining about the Ruger.

[W.R.Buchanan]

45-2.1: Ruger didn't get hurt in the slightest on this gun, in fact Ruger didn't fall on their sword at all, they actually fell into a swimming pool full of money on this one.

They have sold in excess of 100,000 of these rifles in the last 3 years, or so I'm told.

To say the magazine system is faulty simply ignores the facts that I and others on this site who actually own these guns and shoot them regularly, know to be the truth.

I have both Metal and polymer magazines in 5&10rnd metal and 3,5,10 round Polymer mags. All work just fine and an occasional misfeed is really not a big deal when shooting at anything these guns were designed to do, and are usually a result of me short stroking the bolt and not the fault of the mag since cycling a second time always chambers a round.

I talk to Mark Gurney at Ruger every so often and he gives me the scoop on what is happening with this gun and he is also well aware of the thread here that has been going for 3 years and over 600 posts.

This has been one of the most successful rifles Ruger has ever made.

As far as the bottom metal is concerned,,, it is made of Glass Filled Polymer and is as strong or more so the frame of a Glock Pistol and no one can really argue with the success of that platform. To say "it flexes around," is to show no actual hands on experience with the gun. And shooting a few rounds or playing with one in a gun store does not qualify as "Hands on Experience."

I have well over 1000 rounds thru mine and it is a s consistent a gun as I have ever owned as far as operation and accuracy.

My mag system doesn't flex around and it is #159 of the first production run so I think the system was sussed out pretty well before they went into full production.

The magazines are, and I will clarify this one more time for everyone who didn't get the memo over the last 3 years, Accuracy International pattern magazines.

These mags were chosen over the M14 mag due to inconsistencies in the m14 mags manufactured by many different outfits. Ruger didn't want to market this gun with a M14 setup and take pooo from everyone who had M14 mags that didn't function correctly in the Ruger gun. Hence the use of the tried and true AI System.

If this gun was such a loser then why has Mossberg and Savage both started marketing variations of the gun? The fact that they may work with M14 magazines simply means that with 3 years to figure out how to make them work, and with that much development time, they could have probably made anything work.

Ruger has done all the hard work of exposing the gun to the scrutiny of the marketplace and creating a market for this type of rifle so that others could follow, and that speaks volumes about the company and the product.

One last point: If you have looked at and understand how the Mossberg .223 rifle that uses AR mags works, you would realize this was stroke of genius. Their .308 that uses M14 mags works exactly the same way. If you look at it this system closely there is no way that any knowledgeable gun person could say this system would ever stand the test of the Battlefield environment. It is simply too fragile a mechanism to last in the crud.

So comparing these guns to the RGS77 is not going to prove anything except the inferiority of the competition.

There is a lot more to these guns than the magazine, and that ain't half bad either.

Randy

[Artful]

One last point: If you have looked at and understand how the Mossberg .223 rifle that uses AR mags works, you would realize this was stroke of genius. Their .308 that uses M14 mags works exactly the same way. If you look at it this system closely there is no way that any knowledgeable gun person could say this system would ever stand the test of the Battlefield environment. It is simply too fragile a mechanism to last in the crud.

So comparing these guns to the RGS77 is not going to prove anything except the inferiority of the competition.

There is a lot more to these guns than the magazine, and that ain't half bad either.

Randy

7.62 MVP Bolt Face

http://www.rifleshootermag.com/2013/...n-7-62-review/

Doesn't look the same as the 5.56 MVP bolt system...

[robertbank]

The Scout rifle concept isn't really a sporting concept as Col. Cooper put it forth and Ruger has had military procurement contracts for some of its products. Note the Australian and Canadian versions of the Scout rifle we are talking about. Maybe the same difference between the M-14 and M1A.
AR-10 mags are retained thru a square hole in the sidewall of the mag like the H&K..... and I can't see from the picture the button arrangement to hold the mag. I would hope that the Mossberg offering is not plastic... if it is I ain't buying it. There are extremely few magazine rifles I haven't owned at one time or shot when available. The Ishapore does a good job on retention and it is a quite reliable feeder, although long and heavy for a bolt gun.

The difference in the gun we get and the US version is we don't get the flash hider. That small item is a restricted export item thanks to your ever loving US government and their desire to please the UN Small Arms Treaty. Thankfully Canada hasn't signed the treaty....yet.

I do like the Ruger and would buy one if I had a need. Holding on to the magazine to fire a rifle.....like really. It may work shooting the varmint rifle our military folks use but a real cartridge like the .308, no I don't think so.

Take Care
Bob

ps Randy the only reason why Ruger makes any firearm is to make money. No other reason and it is number one. Making a quality product is how they achieve their primary objective ie making a profit. Some business models suggest you can reduce quality and still generate a profit. It works until the marketplace figures out your business model. Winchester, Marlin, the Big 3 Carmakers are examples of businesses who tried plan B. Doesn't work in the long run. Companies like Beretta, CZ, SIG and Ruger are examples of companies who use plan A.